Current ConcernsThe international journal for independent thought, ethical standards, moral responsibility,

and for the promotion and respect of public international law, human rights and humanitarian law

11 May 2015No 12ISSN 1664-7963

Current Concerns PO BoxCH-8044 ZurichSwitzerland

Phone: +41 44 350 65 50Fax: +41 44 350 65 51

E-Mail: CurrentConcerns@zeit-fragen.chWebsite: www.currentconcerns.ch English Edition of Zeit-Fragen

We are faced with a complex question when we are called to the ballot box on 14 June in order to decide on the submis-sion regarding pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Specifically this involves the amendment of Article 119 of the Federal Constitution, so that genetic testing the so-called pre-implantation genetic diag-nosis (PGD) can be carried out in em-bryos produced in vitro. The PGD shall be allowed in the Reproductive Medicine Act. The original proposal of the Feder-al Council wanted to allow PGD only for those sets of parents who are aware of the risk of passing on a serious genetic dis-ease. In order not to abandon the wish for a child from the outset, PGD should allow to exclude a possible inheritance of such diseases.

The process as such already raises a number of ethical questions. With the new wording of the law by a parliamentary ma-jority, these questions are raised anew and in quite a different urgency. Each of the embryos artificially produced should be tested for inherited diseases and supernu-

merary or missing chromosomes by the Preimplantation Genetic Screening. And upon acceptance of the amended Constitu-tion article it would allow that as many human egg cells can be developed into embryos outside the body of the woman than are needed for medically assisted re-production. (BV Art. 119 para. 2 c) What does that mean? Why this vague extension

and disconnection of women and pregnan-cy? Today, the embryo may be protected even before it is implanted in the uterus. How much longer? And what lies ahead?

The discussion about human breeding in the sense of genetic selection has already been launched in our media (see Only the

Reflections on Pre-implantation genetic diagnosisby Erika Vgeli

Genetic engineering: so far nothing therapeutically applicable

Despite considerable investments into the research of gene therapy from both the state and the private sector as well as the distribution of venture capi-tal worth billions to countless biotech start-ups, so far, nothing therapeuti-cally applicable could be developed. (p. 32)

Where has the proclaimed genet-ic revolution gone, wonders medical ethicist and philosopher Urban Wies-ing as well in a Spiegel interview. It was [] predicted that in 15 to 20 years the majority of medicine would

be consisting of gene therapy. So far, however, to my knowledge, there is no study examining gene therapy with re-spect to its therapeutic usability or its broader applicability. In summary, the predictions resulting from the new-est discoveries in the field of genetics were exceeding real-life developments by far.(p. 32)

One has no idea where to run, but does so even faster. (p. 34)

Felix Hasler, Neuromythology

Bielefeld 2012

On June 14, 2015, the Swiss people will vote on the question whether Art. 119 of the Federal Constitution should be amended, so that in future embryos can be produced in an undefined number out-side the mothers womb, without having to be implanted immediately after their creation. This constitutional amend-ment provides the basis for the approv-al of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), which is currently prohibited in

Switzerland. The amendment, which at first glance seems to be insignificant, is vaguely formulated and concerning the Implementing Law of Art. 119, the Re-productive Medicine Act (FmedG), it in-cludes a large scope for the selection of life worth living and not worth liv-ing and the possibility of unlimited pro-duction of embryos. On 14 June, we can and must stop this dangerous trend with a No!

Valid:Art. 119 BV is constitutional basis For artificial insemination (in vitro fer-

tilization, IVF) For the ban of pre-implantation genetic

diagnosisThe Implementing Law, Reproductive Medicine Act Governs the IVF in detail Limits the production to a maximum of

3 embryos

Bans the cryopreservation (deep-freez-ing) of embryos

Proposed constitutional amendment Art. 119 para. 2c and proposed amendment to the Reproductive

Medicine Act The constitutional amendment of Art. 119 para. 2c and the change of the Reproduc-tive Medicine Act were discussed in Par-liament at the same time, aiming at the permission of pre-implantation genetic di-agnosis in Switzerland. With respect to the two bills there is only one message of the Federal Council: 13,051. Message on the amendment of the constitutional provision on reproductive medicine and genetic engi-neering in human medicine (Art. 119 BV) and of the law on reproductive medicine (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) of 7 June 2013.

Federal referendum on 14 June 2015

A clear No on pre-implantation genetic diagnosisby Dr med Susanne Lippmann Rieder

Federal Constitution Art. 119, par. 2c Yet: [...] no more human egg cells may be developed into embryos out-side a womans body than are capable of being immediately implanted into her. Proposed amendment: [...] no more human egg cells may be developed into embryos outside a womans body than are necessary for medically-assist-ed reproduction.

continued on page 3

continued on page 2

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 2

Thoughts about pre-implantation continued from page 1

best for the offspring, Neue Zrcher Zei-tung of 17 April 2015). In the 1930s, this was referred to as eugenics the term rais-es appalling memories of master race selec-tion. That is why the discussion of tech-nological enhancement travels under the label trans-humanism today. In essence, nothing has changed, though: Authorized by reason and science an obligation to progress is postulated which supposedly includes an enhancement of human na-ture by technological means, towards the post-humane or trans-humane. But who will show the direction? Which hu-mankind should we aim for? Who will de-fine what real progress is? Who aspires to design such an artificial evolution? Besides, after a world-wide hype about Dolly the cloned sheep, there is a silence today which is almost deafening. Despite billions of investment not a single method of so-called gene therapy has materialized as routine medical practice as yet. And also in the area of the Human Brain Project all new discoveries just deepen the conviction that there is so little we really know and understand. That means, of course, that we might go ahead and make something but we would indeed not be able to foresee the consequences of such interference with nature. (cf. box)

With due respect for the capabilities of scientific knowledge and technolog-ical developments, neither the creation of the cosmos, of our planet, nor life and the design of human nature is what we are in charge of with our human tasks and skills. It goes without saying that medical research, for instance, has achieved real blessings for us, without which many of us or our nearest and dearest and many more people on earth would not be with us any longer or would have to endure se-vere hardships. Medicine has made our

lives easier, may offer healing where there used to be hopelessness and ease pain and suffering that used to be unbearable. We are all grateful for that. But suffering, dis-ease and impaired range of activities will never be completely avoidable, they be-long to our lives and have to be faced by everybody in one way or another at some point. Therefore we have to consider not only what is practically feasible, but also what all these discussions of Human En-hancement are doing to us to the way we view life and humankind in its eternal and inevitable imperfection.

It is rarely articulated in that debate that things in the genomic field are obvious-ly not as easy as we had hoped for a cou-ple of years ago. For a start, there are not just genes to be found in the genome and to explain and make available all pheno-typic properties. And it is not enough con-sidered what various researchers have re-cently contributed from the perspective of epigenics that genetic information may even change during lifetime due to the in-terplay of biological and social influenc-es from the environment, challenging the certainty of some prognoses that had ap-peared rock solid.

From a psychological perspective one might add: Here experience shows, per-haps more clearly than anywhere else, that every human being communicates and interconnects with society from the first day of his or her life, developing a unique, distinctive personality in the pro-cess. Equal as all humans may be in prin-ciple, this simple fact challenges every attempt to explain character and person-ality traits including intelligence, for that matter by genetic heredity alone. This does not mean that we cannot de-fine optimal conditions for the promo-tion of a healthy physical, psycho-spirit-ual and social development. People have been searching for those as long as hu-mankind has existed, and our generation

benefits from the achievements and tradi-tions of countless predecessors who con-tributed to this knowledge.

After all we cant help being social, un-able to survive without our fellow human ebeings and to fully develop our human-ness disconnected from others. We are not just a pool of genes, designed as desired, and then automatically turning into the in-tended product. We are embedded into a stream of human history, part of a histor-ical, cultural and social string born and raised here and today in a specific humane context.

In order to explain and understand many diseases and patho-mechanisms these in-teractions have to be considered much more carefully. Our tunnel vision of focus-ing on genetic data alone has in fact dis-torted our views in many aspects over the recent years. Another remark: No Human Genome Project and No Human Enhance-ment will ever abolish the consequences of all those bombs and missiles, this radio-active dust they left behind which keeps spreading over the attacked countries but is also traveling to us and mayme dis-rupting the lives of people inhaling it with malignant (multiple) tumors, birth defects and other diseases due to DNA molecule fractures and other gene defects. Efforts have been made to quell the discussion of these problems for years and decades now. Nevertheless, it will surface one day.

Should Human Enhancement make any sense, it would be our effort to gain insight into our nature and direction of development towards more empathy, hu-maneness, justice and peace for all hu-mankind, but certainly not the ascen-sion of some individuals to a top position in their competition quarrels. All experi-ence shows: Rather than by competition and selection, the most stable and sustain-able successes are achieved by dialogue and cooperation, which open the gates for the contest of diversity.

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 3

On 12 December 2014, the Parliament adopted the Federal Councils alternative to the constitutional amendment. We will explain in more detail below, what the amendment of this nondescript half-sen-tence means.

However, when changing the Repro-ductive Medicine Act (rFMedG), the Par-liament opened the barrier originally set

by the Federal Council: In its draft law, the Federal Council wanted a restriction of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis for couples with hereditary handicap; i.e. PGD only for hereditary diseases (50 to 100 couples per year), not for chromo-somal abnormalities. And he set a limit for the production of embryos outside the womans body: 3 embryos, if the genet-ic material of the embryos is not being examined, 8 embryos if the genetic ma-terial of the embryos is being examined. The rFMedG, now adopted by Parlia-

ment, goes far beyond the practice in our neighboring countries: It allows genetic testing for the exami-

nation of hereditary diseases and chro-mosomal abnormalities for all couples making use of IVF (today more than 6,000 per year).

It increases the scope for embryos pro-duced outside the body to 12 per cycle (an open number upwards was still re-jected).

The ban on cryopreservation was revoked according to the proposal of the Federal Council. This is essential for the so-called storage of embryos.

This means: In the future, in principle all embryos created outside the mothers womb could be examined and selected in the test tube by means of all technically available genetic tests! And a huge num-ber of so-called supernumerary embryos would be created. What for?

The parliamentary debate was marked by a huge commitment in favour of the constitutional amendment and the revi-sion of the law on the part of Felix Gut-zwiller, responsible President of the Commission for Science and Educa-tion of the Council of States. Consider-ing the controversial debate, it is amaz-ing how rapidly this business has been adopted, namely after years and al-ready after the second round. It remains an open question, what has been the rea-son for the Council of States change of mood, that, as premier legislative body, voted against an expansion of FMedG. What is certain is that the committees were repeatedly visited by advocates of a so-called liberal regime of reproduc-tive medicine and that also the opinion of the National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics has contributed to this change of mood.

If the people and the Council of States say No to the constitutional amend-ment, the changes of the FmedG, as al-ready adopted by the Parliament, will not enter into force, that is, that the ban on pre-implantation genetic diagnosis will persist. Thus, all those who work for a reproductive medicine la liberal eugenics or those who want to especially gain commercial benefits, would not be supported by the Constitution. If the constitutional amendment was accepted, the Federal Council would enact the revised Reproductive Medicine Act (rFMedG), unless the referendum would be taken up against this amendment. Sev-eral organizations have already announced that the referendum would be taken up. We can not allow to have a law in our country that would allow the eugenic selection and destruction of unwanted embryos!Therefore, with a No to the constitution-al amendment of Art. 119 on 14 June, you will also say No to one of the most far-reaching laws on reproductive medicine in Europe.

A clear No on continued from page 1 What happens to the

tested embryos?

Only the desired embryos will be im-planted into the mothers womb after the genetic tests (in most cases on the 5th day after fertilization) or frozen as spare. The deep frozen spare embryos can be used for another pregnancy. Or they can, according to the Stem cell research law (originally embryo re-search law), be used for the isolation of embryo stem cells that is, also for research if the affected couple has approved this in writing. Undesired embryos are destroyed we are not aware of any legal foundation for this.

What is pre-implantation diagnostics?

Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is the genetic profiling of an embryo formed by in vitro fertilization prior to implantation into the uterus. For this, 1-2 cells are taken by biopsy from the embryo in the 6-8 cell stage and subsequently examined in a labo-ratory. Thus it is possible to find out if the embryo is carrying a congenital dis-ease or some modification of the chro-mosomes. This facilitates the selection of the childs sex or other inherited fea-tures. PGD can also be used for the cre-ation of a so-called saviour sibling, a genetically compatible donor of stem cells for an existing affected child.

Arguments against the constitutional amendmentConstitutional amendment reaches

beyond the original purpose, the immediate implantation

The constitutional amendment reaches be-yond the original purpose, namely to in-duce a pregnancy by immediate implan-tation of the embryo in the womb of the mother. In the applicable constitutional ar-ticle the action addresses the mother, the woman. In the planned article a change of addresses takes place: The formulation is newly addressed towards the biomedical procedure medically-assisted reproduc-tion. The mother, the woman does not even occur any longer.

The legislator could have formulated than are necessary for her medically-as-sisted reproduction. These two missing

words show that it is about producing su-pernumerary embryos and it might even be about further interests.

Blurred expressions

The Constitution does not clarify what is meant by medically assisted repro-duction. The legislator might alternately have formulated than are necessary for achieving pregnancy.

With this wide formulation, the deci-sion concerning the number of embry-os to be produced is left to reproductive medicine, respectively to the Reproduc-tive Medicine Act. It would even open the way to permit further conceivable re-productive processes in future, solely via amendments at the legislative level.

As a physician I am warning of the usage of genetic tests, be they for prospective parents, interested sin-gles or unborn children: there is an error rate, both for so-called false positive and for false negative re-sults. And the tests are misleadingly supporting the idea of having every-thing under control. In Great Brit-ain, for example, there are so-called assay kits searching for 250 or even 448 diseases. Which of them should justify elimination? And the list is growing and growing.

continued on page 4

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 4

What is eugenics?

Eugenics is the ideology of improving the genetic endowment of human population through the selection of supposedly healthy and valuable hu-mans.

Unclear embryo protection: Constitutional amendment is a contradiction in itself

By the constitutional amendment, the selection of embryos with wanted and the rejection of embryos with not want-ed genetic material is possible. The first one would be implanted, others would be destroyed and countless would be left to an uncertain fate by cryopreservation.

The constitutional amendment under-mines the Protection given by the Consti-tution (BV Art 119 para 1): The human being is protected against the misuse by reproductive medicine and gene technol-ogy, since it is a contradiction in itself.

However, the legal system as well as medicine should aim at healing ill human beings including ill embryos and not at their elimination. Only such a legal system allows to use the limited human knowl-edge at the best, that is to help man to lead fulfilling lives.

Paradigm shift: production of so-called supernumerary embryos

The new possibility to develop as many embryos as necessary for medically as-sisted reproduction would lead to a fun-damental change in dealing with the human life in its origin. The constitution-al amendment allows the production of supernumerary embryos without limits! And these might be selected, freezed, supplied for research. And: the genome of all those tested would be known.

This amendment of the constitution is a paradigm shift and throws the gates to eugenics wide open! Human life must not be distinguished as a life worth living and an unworthy life. Where shall the limits be and who will decide about them?

Right to life a non-negotiable human right

We as voters are called upon to deter-minedly reject the delusion that man could plan a society without handicaps and ill-nesses which is the ideology of eugen-ics. Such an attitude violates the most fun-damental of all human rights, the right to life. Its origin is the ideology of eugenics.

The step on to the slippery slope has already been taken

Fact and crucial point is that there are ex-ponents in our country, as well, who are campaigning for medically assisted repro-duction without limits and pursue this tar-get with salami tactics. These exponents have indeed won a first goal in Parlia-ment with the immense extension of the Reproductive Medicine Act. The adopted expansion surpasses by far the practice in our neighbouring countries and has even

not been proposed by the majority of the responsible commissions members, the Swiss National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics. In Parliament Fed-eral Councillor Berset even still warned against the possibility of eugenic selec-tion. In the Swiss National Council he said: () because as a consequence of this significant extension arises the ques-tion of selection, and by the screening the question of a certain tendency to eu-genic selection.1In the Swiss Council of States: So this is about an active choice, a selection which in fact allows us to use the term eugen-ics, as Mr Bieri reminded us; we cannot easily dismiss this.2

An expansion of the scope of appli-cation is technically possible. There is great danger that in future everything that is technically possible is likely to be ap-plied, initially probably step by step. The necessary legislative changes could be en-forced at the parliamentary level. To initi-ate a referendum with every change com-ing by means of such salami tactics, might indeed be tiring.

Professor Maio, medical ethicist, in his textbook Ethics in Medicine warned ex-plicitly against this step which our par-liament already has carried out.

Further liberalisation measures can be expected

Further liberalisation measures are sub-ject of the public debate, even now. Thus, the Swiss National Advisory Commission on Biomedical Ethics already declared it-self in favour of egg donation by its ma-jority, embryo donation, surrogate moth-erhood or suspension of the maximum number of embryos allowed to develop. Even a request for the creation of saviour siblings was discussed in Parliament, but did not receive the support of a majority

this time. It is merely a matter of time that this request will be repeated after a pos-sible approval of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis PGD.

Looking abroad shows what else is possible: In USA and Great Britain the production of designer-babies is possible: Selection of sperms and eggs according to sex, hair and eye colour or as well as spe-cific character traits and physical abilities. A successful carrier by social egg freez-ing is promised to women. Genetic tests are unrestrictedly available for PGD. Re-cently the first three-parents-baby was born in Great Britain.

Last week was published that Chinese researchers modified a gene in the genet-ic material of human embryos. A proce-dure which is forbidden in Switzerland at constitutional level and creates the risk of dangerous mutations. How long will it take in Switzerland until the ex-isting limits set by human rights will be exceeded?

Who profits from this harmless sound-ing amendment of the constitution?

Commercial interests of pharmaceutical industry, stem cell researchers, manufac-turers of genetic tests and institutions for medically assisted reproduction cannot be denied.

Such a law serves those sick brains who plead for genetic improvement of children with the argument to do just the best for the offspring.3 1 Amtliches Bulletin (Official Bulletin), Nation-

al Council, 3.6.2014, page 292 Amtliches Bulletin (Official Bulletin), Coun-

cil of States, 8.9.2014, page 103 Nur das Beste fr den Nachwuchs, Markus Hof-

mann, Neue Zrcher Zeitung, 17 April 2015Via homepage of the national committee No-to-PGD, www.nein-zur-pid.ch, you can order flyers and posters or join one of the cantonal committees or the doctors committee No-to-PGD.

Arguments against the continued from page 3 In principle, the rFMedG law already

passed by the parliament would allow to examine and select all in vitro fertilized embryos with all avail-able genetic tests. Thus there would be embryos with desired genome which are either implanted into the mother or deep frozen. And there would also be embryos with unde-sired genome who are singled out and discarded (?) in a laboratory.

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 5

From the exceptional to regular selection

Misleadingly it is often attempted to equate PGD with prenatal diagnosis. But the argument that the same diseases or chromosomal changes can be detected by both methods, falls short. With prena-tal diagnosis the parents-to-be, in partic-ular the pregnant woman, have to decide whether the embryo will be held in the womb of the woman and live. They do not select the best embryo of several. They are faced with the question of whether they want to keep the one child and are able to opt for a life with a disabled child. For PGD, however, a sample of embryos is artificially produced, the couple or medi-cal staff decide which embryo is to be im-planted due to its genetic disposition.

Little-known factsAs a motive for the introduction of PGD the main argumentation is that it helps couples with fertility problems. Medical studies show, however, that PGD does not increase the chance of getting pregnant with IVF (cf. Harper among others 2010). In addition hormone stimulation puts a considerable strain on the womans body, as up to 12 eggs and more are required for PGD. The possibility of PGD in combi-nation with Social Egg Freezing raises false hopes on problem-free motherhood at an advanced age (cf. insieme 2014 a). It should further be noted that the introduc-tion of PGD is also going to entail huge economic benefits. In Austria and in Italy,

PGD is still banned entirely, in France and in Germany it is regulated restrictively. In case of a liberal legislation Switzerland becomes an attractive place of treatment for infertile couples from surrounding countries. [...]

Referendum 2015: Chance for a public discussion

On 14 June 2015 the Swiss people will vote on whether Article 119 of the Feder-al Constitution will be changed so that in future, embryos in greater numbers can be developed and stored outside the womb. This constitutional amendment is a pre-requisite for the modified Reproductive Medicine Act to become effective.

Insieme Switzerland and other organi-sations for the disabled see the referendum as an opportunity for a public debate about preconceived value judgements about peo-ple with disabilities.

They want to introduce considerations and warnings from the perspective of peo-ple with disabilities into the debate (in-sieme 2014 b):diseaseanddisabilitybelongtolife,but

they do not determine its value. PGD entails an evaluative selection of life. For people, who are genetically im-paired in a way that is regarded as un-desirable, this selection will inevitably have an impact on their perception of themselves and of others.

Mostdisabilitiescomeintoexistenceduring or after birth and are not ge-netic. PGD gives rise to the mislead-

ing notion that disabilities and diseas-es could be prevented by using prenatal diagnostics.

Shouldchromosomescreeningbeal-lowed, all prospective parents would be under progressively increasing pressure as a result of peoples expec-tations that they undertake everything that is technically feasible to prevent the birth of a child with a disability. Thus it would become increasingly difficult to decide in a free and auton-omous fashion.

Wemustavoidasituationwherepar-ents are exposed to pressure to justify their actions or, in extreme cases, have to bear negative consequences if they decide against prenatal diagnostic or if they deliberately decide in favour of a child with a disability.

For centuries, people with a trisomy were part of our society. If the development of PGD continues unreservedly, this may change. Is that what we want? Things will not stop at the testing for heredi-tary diseases and trisomies. There will be a demand for screening and eliminat-ing further undesirable dispositions and characteristics. Imagine: Which ones will that be? What image of humanity will we let ourselves be guided by? http://insieme.ch/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Primplantationsdiagnostik_wo-setzen-wir-die-Grenzen_vhn.pdf(Translation Current Concerns)

Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis: Where do we set the limits?The medically feasible urges society as a whole to answer fundamental ethical questions

by Christa Schnbchler and Stefanie Dadier, insieme Switzerland, Berne (excerpt)

One cannot select ones childrenThe Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches opinion on the Constitutional revision of Article 119 of the Federal Constitution

In the referendum on Article 119 of the Federal Constitution is a mere seven words in a nondescript sentence of par-agraph 2, letter c, and sentence 3. It will specify how many embryos can be pro-duced artificially. Today, the following applies: There may be so many embryos produced outside the mothers womb, as she can immediately be implanted with. New, this sentence part should read: as are necessary for the medically assisted reproduction. The revision of Article 119 BV is a prerequisite for the lifting of the ban on pre-implantation genetic diagno-sis (PGD) in reproduction medical law.

Lawmakers want to enable parents, who have a hereditary disposition, to have a possible genetic investigation in the scope of artificial fertilization. The Federation

of Swiss Protestant Churches can under-stand this concern. However, the geneti-cally based selection of embryos pene-trates the highly sensitive and problematic area of eugenics, i.e. the artificial selec-tion and control of human reproduction. Therefore, a clear and strict legal regu-lation must be established. The revision presented does not fulfil this condition. Therefore, the Federation of Swiss Prot-estant Churches rejects the constitutional amendment.

The Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches reasons for its rejection are as follows:

1. Problematic change of purpose: Under current law, only as many embryos from a womans eggs shall be produced, as she will in fact have implanted. The amended Constitution Article no longer

has the woman in mind, but merely the necessary medical measures. This change of purpose focuses exclusively on biomed-icine and its interests. The real purpose, enabling a pregnancy, is no longer men-tioned.

2. Retraction of the legislature: With the revision of Article 119 BV, the deci-sion on the number of embryos produced is relinquished solely to the reproductive medicine. The legislature omitted in fact a legal limitation of the PGD, and opened a new practice of reproductive medicine field from which it at the same time with-draws itself. Surplus embryos might in future because they are already there also be used for research or for so-called saviour babies.

continued on page 6

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 6

In Switzerland, the people are the high-est state authority. The sovereign author-ity decides on any amendment to the Fed-eral Constitution. With the means of the popular initiative and the optional refer-endum, citizens can engage in political debate and determine how our political system is to look like and in which direc-tion it should develop. However, for some time now this has appeared to no long-er please certain people. Apparently in some cantons and at the federal level, the executive and its administrative appara-tus urgently need some tutoring sessions regarding direct democracy.

Approximately twenty years ago it was still clear to every politician and to every ad-ministrative authority: As soon as the sov-ereign authority has decided, there is noth-ing more to add to or to detract from the decision. Until recently the high respect of the authorities towards the directly demo-cratic political system allowed the Federal Council or the cantonal governments with their administrators to implement the de-cision resulting from the referendum, even if they themselves had wished differently.

Among the indispensable prerequisites of direct democracy is the one that the population may at any time inform them-selves about a planned legislative process and about ongoing negotiations with other countries. Because only complete transpar-ency by the government allows the citizens to form an opinion that deserves this label in a direct democracy.

Relationship of trust must be restored between the people and the authorities

A special relationship of trust between the population and the authorities was tradition in Switzerland. In dealing with each other they met on equal footing and adhered to the principle of good faith. Many citizens are also members of ad-ministrative bodies or commissions. For example, some hold a mandate in the canton and the city council simultane-ously, or are Mayor and National Coun-cillor or cantonal and federal parliamen-tarian, etc. The separation of powers applies in Switzerland only at the same state level; it is highly desirable, that for example a local elected official can have a say in the canton or the federal gov-ernment, too. This refined interaction is based on the shared high democratic awareness and is a magnificent achieve-ment in the history of Switzerland. But this interaction works only if all parties are willing to contribute to the preserva-tion of the Swiss model.

Since the beginning of the nineties, the respect for the will of the people has crumbled with many law enforcement agencies and party politicians. As a re-sult many dedicated, down-to-earth cit-izens have lost confidence in the state to a certain extent, especially at the fed-eral and partly at the cantonal level. This has become especially evident since 6 De-cember 1992, when the Swiss people said No to the EEA accession. But the ex-

ponentially increasing interference of the OECD and the United States with the in-ternal affairs of Switzerland, tolerated by the Federal Council without having con-sulted the people, does not contribute to the citizens trust in the state.

As a consequence of the peoples No to the EEA, the Bilateral Agree-ments I and II have been negotiated be-tween Switzerland and the EU. A ma-jority of the citizens voted for these agreements, since they were mistaken to believe the assurances of the Feder-al Council and the economy (read: the large corporations that have their head-quarters in Switzerland, but have long been abroad operating their production and business there): The citizens were deceived into believing that the Bilateral Agreements were essential for the econ-omy and would not curtail our independ-ence from the EU and the citizens polit-ical rights.

Meanwhile, many citizens have re-alized that the bilateral agreements pri-marily serve the EU and its corporations. For example, the floods of trucks pour-ing through our county and polluting our air, hardly contribute to the benefit of our population. And the annual net influx of more than 80,000 immigrants is simply no longer acceptable for a small and densely populated country like Switzerland. The voters have acknowledged this with their

If the people decides otherwise or might decide otherwise Small tutoring session for administrative officers and other experts

by Dr iur Marianne Wthrich

3. Unclear Embryo Protection: The ge-netic engineering developments prompt-ed the legislature, to include an article on the dignity of creation in the Con-stitution (Article 120 BV). Is there an analogous protection of dignity for human embryos? The current version of Art. 119 BV does not explicitly include it, but it is understood to give such protection. This protection would, however, be void with the adoption of the proposed amendment. Therefore, the Federation of Swiss Protes-tant Churches calls for an article that ex-plicitly places the dignity of the embryo under the protection of the Federal Con-stitution.

4. From the exception to the rule: Human life whether born or unborn must be protected. The embryo selection collides with the fundamental duty to pro-

tect human life. Therefore, PGD occurs only as an exception to the basic life pro-tection in question and not as a freely se-lective alternative. At the same time an ethical consultation is required before the decision to use PGD. Because in the de-cision, to apply PGD, the Yes to use em-bryo selection is already included. The consequences and impositions of a con-science decision must therefore be clari-fied and weighed before the decision for a PGD. The danger that exceptions to the rule become self-evident is great, especial-ly in the context of the new biotechnolo-gies. To counteract this is a task for the whole of society.

5. The specification of Gods Yes to every human: freedom of choice is a val-uable asset that requires a willingness to take on responsibility. How much respon-sibility should be imposed on people, and when does it become an unbearable bur-den? Should the choice of human life re-

ally become an everyday decision? The Bible knows about the dangers of exces-sive human demands and therefore has the story of Gods Yes to every human prom-inently placed at the beginning: Every human is the divinely willed creature. Be-cause for the creator no life is condemn-able (1 Tim 4:4), no human life must be revised and selected. This basic decision to life must be reflected in societal condi-tions in which every child is welcome, and parents get all the support and every pos-sible reason to accept their child happily and also bravely.

A detailed 12-page opinion of the SEC found in www.kirchenbund.ch under Publications. Swiss Protestant Churches Sulgenauweg 26, CH-3000 Berne, Tel +41 31 370 2525, e-mail: info@sek.ch

(Translation Current Concerns)

One cannot select continued from page 5

continued on page 7

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 7

yes to the Mass Immigration Initiative on 9 February 2014.

Attacks on the political rights of Swiss citizens must be fended off

Given the insidious attempts to disempow-er the sovereign people, it is a pleasure for any active citizen to witness how many fellow citizens there are who let them-selves not be defeated. 53 federal popular initiatives have been conducted at the fed-eral level alone between 2002 and 2014, ten of which were accepted at the ballot box! A remarkable result!

However, the would-be constitution-al reformers of Switzerland are not par-ticularly pleased with the success of direct-democratic instruments. For ex-ample, Lukas Rhli, executive member of the think tank Avenir Suisse demands reforms of the right of popular initiative, as an initiative will [...] rarely be imple-mented in accordance with the desire of its founders. (Media communiqu from 7 April 2015) True, neither the Initiative on Preventive Detention, nor the Depor-tation Initiative, neither the Second Home Initiative nor the Mass Immigration Initi-ative have been implemented so far. How-ever, bringing the right of popular initia-tive in line with Rhlis desires not to let it degenerate into a farce (Lukas Rhli) would mean putting the cart before the horse.

Among other things, he makes the fol-lowing suggestions: A substantial prelim-inary examination of popular initiatives by the Federal Chancellery however, its introduction, as you already know, re-cently flunked with timpani and trum-pets as early as in the consultation proce-

dure. Another suggestion was to increase the number of confirmed signatures from 100,000 to 210,000 (4% of the elector-ate).

Did the perpetrators of such ideas ever take part in collecting 100,000 signatures? If so, it would be clear to them: To collect 100,000 signatures, the collectors need ex-actly the same amount of time regard-less of the current number of citizens en-titled to vote.

Not the right of popular initiative is to be brought into line but the Federal Council, including its administrative bub-ble. The Federal Assembly and the Fed-eral Court have to adjust. In fact, by the will of the people the texts of the initia-tives adopted at the ballot box are to be-come articles in the Swiss Federal Con-stitution, the supreme legal institution of our country. The authorities and their of-ficials are responsible for ensuring that the Constitution is implemented in ac-cordance with its wording in laws and then applied, even if this does not suit some people in Brussels or overseas. The Swiss popular initiative Swiss law in-stead of foreign judges (self-determina-tion Initiative) was launched recently to remind the servant and representa-tive of the people of their duty.

Canton executives more or less capable of democracy

The surreptitious method does not quite work with respect to Curriculum 21. As reported earlier, the so-called legal basis of this unspeakable construct rests on a mere administrative arrangement of Cantonal Governments. Hoping that no-body would notice anything about it dur-ing three years, the Swiss Conference of Cantonal Ministers of Education EDK hatched its odd ideas behind closed doors.

(see Current Concerns No 31/32 from 31 October 2013)

But the Swiss population is not going to tolerate this approach; many parents and teachers have already spoken out and will continue to do so. In the cantons popular initiatives are sprouting from the ground, requesting the withdrawal from HarmoS or demanding that voters can vote on the cur-riculum of the elementary school.

And how do the cantonal governments act? Some behave correctly as the Canton of Aargau, where the introduction of the curriculum has been postponed for a few years, so that the population can decide on the popular initiative Yes to a good educa-tion No to the Curriculum 21 before its implementation. Other cantons push ahead and implement the controversial curric-ulum rapidly. For example the Canton of Basel-Stadt has indeed literally implement-ed it without the so-called adjustments to cantonal circumstances. Coincidental-ly, the Basel Education Director Chris-toph Eymann, also the president of the EDK, as such, behaves as if he were the boss of the country: We are not afraid that we remain the only ones. All cantons will take this path, Eymann said arrogantly on 4.12.2014 on television SRF.

However, he might be tremendous-ly mistaken! The Councillor of State of Basel-Stadt, the Social Democrat Anita Fetz, in any case has a very different view of this matter: Let the school alone! Curriculum 21 has failed, says Fetz in an interview. (Die Zeit, No 44/2014 of 23 October 2014)

By the way, in October of this year Christoph Eymann (Liberal Democratic Party LDP) plans to run as Council can-didate and to take Fetzs seat. The people of Basel have it in their hands to choose either him or her as their Councillor.

If the people decides otherwise continued from page 6

TiSA a secretly negotiated agreement with secret contentby Dr iur Marianne Wthrich

Next, what will happen to Switzerland if we dont do anything about it is our slipping into the so-called Free Trade Agreements (TTIP and TiSA). They will, in no way, be concluded for the benefit of the citizens, neither for the benefit of any other involved countries citizens. Eve-rything is planned and controlled by the transatlantic Big Brother.

Only a few months ago, the interested citizens learned by some well-informed Internet user that the United States was planning a comprehensive agreement on trade in services, named Trade in Servic-es Agreement, short TiSA. By this treaty, they wanted to include as many countries of their choice as possible the Real-ly Good Friends. Understandably, in an-ti-globalization circles, this name pro-

vokes suspicion. The 23 TiSA countries would dominate about 70% of the global service sector. But not only within the left and green circles are the TiSA negotiations arousing discomfort. Recently, the former European Commissioner and Luxembourg Christian Social politician, Viviane Reding, said about TiSA: This is a time bomb tick-ing, only nobody detected it, yet. (Radio SRF, 17.4.2015, Echo der Zeit)

By the way, Switzerland is also among the propitiously elected countries whose service market the United States would like to take over. Since February 2012, the secret negotiations are underway in Gene-va, led by the United States, Australia and the EU.

It seems that also our parliamentarians learned rather late about the Swiss partic-

ipation in the TiSA negotiations doesnt the system of non-disclosure work well, indeed! Anyway, the Green Parlamenta-ry Group was active in 2014: By three interpellations, National Councillor Aline Trede (GP BE), representing 11 co-sign-ers, wanted the Federal Council to dis-close, on what legal basis the participa-tion of Switzerland was founded, how TiSA differed from GATS, why the ne-gotiations were kept secret and final-ly: What consequences would the sign-ing of TiSA have on the public services (planned liberalization) and which juris-diction Switzerland would be subjected to? (14.3102, 14.4160 and 14.4295 Inter-pellation Trede)

continued on page 8

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 8

Replies by the Federal Council:The legal basis was the Doha mandate

of 2002 (!), because TiSA would not fun-damentally differ from GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services). Is it different or isnt it?

The rest is drowned in spongy versions as well: Secret negotiations were permit-ted by law [sic!], everything else is in the stars, for example: The question of a possible dispute resolution mechanism in TiSA is open and will be the subject of negotiations in due course (interpellation Trede 14.3102). This means in plain text: Well see each other next in front of a US-American so-called arbitration court, completely impartial of course!

Further the Federal Council refers to the written submissions of Switzerland in its answer: 14 in number, to be found on the home page of the SECO (http://www.seco.admin.ch), all exclusively in English, as well as two press releases.

How did that go again with the three official languages in Switzerland? Each baloney is diligently translated by the federal administration; TiSA documents which are very complex even in Ger-man! can only be read by those citizens who are so open to the world that they are able to read the documents in English without any effort?!

Critical citizens put the matter straightFortunately, the Swiss are not so easy to deceive. A fine example of the populations critical opinion is found in an informa-tion event of VPOD (Swiss Association of the Staff in Public Services) in front of 30 Basel bus and tram chauffeurs, commented by the Swiss Radio. (SRF 17.04.2015, 6.00 p.m., Echo der Zeit) The union members, speakers and listeners, as well as SRF-ed-itor Massimo Agostinis get to the heart of the matter and explain why they are right-ly suspicious about Switzerlands partici-pation in an agreement initiated by the US and largely concealed to the public.

Because TiSA is not only planned to liberalize the private services sector, i.e. the banking or insurance industry, but also public services could be deregulated, said VPOD-Central Secretary Stefan Giger in his presentation. This would include health care, education or public trans-port. These are all sectors in which the VPOD has a strong presence. Therefore, it currently is the loudest voice against the TiSA agreement in Switzerland. One of the here present tram drivers voiced his

concern over the fact that GATS had al-ready been the starting point for the ex-pansion of liberalization. It is favourable neither for the employees nor for the con-sumers, i.e. the taxpayers.

Christian Etter, in charge of the for-eign trade sector in the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO) rejects the VPODs allegation that clandestine ne-gotiations were taking place about state services, as well, such as education or health care: Well, this statement is based on wrong ideas. However, he is not al-lowed to put the cards on the table, for the negotiating nations promised each other strict secrecy. Christian Etter points to the homepage of SECO, where all aspects are listed about which Switzerland is not willing to negotiate. They include all of todays public services like post, public traffic, health care and education systems among others.

Stefan Giger of VPOD replies that it is true that SECO (State Secretariat for Economic Affairs) did not want to nego-tiate, but additionally to the actual text of the agreement the annexes would include several aspects which Switzerland does not want to have. SECO also says here: Wrong! An annex applies only if it has been adopted by all.

TiSA will further restrict the sphere of political action in favor of private enter-prise, critics of globalisation insist. The problem is: No one knows whether these cases will actually become more with TiSA, since only very few people know what exactly has been negotiated. And thats probably the biggest blind spot.

* * *

Comment: Let us once more reflect the statements made by SECO, the State Sec-retariat in charge of TiSA, (taking into ac-count the hints by the SRF business sec-tion that Christian Etter may not lay his cards on the table):

[...] Unnecessary, unjustified barriers to trade are to be reduced and planning se-curity for the international services busi-ness is to be increased.

This refers to trade barriers that have been erected by the legislation of the na-tional states to protect their own econo-my: The interests of multinationals are to be given preferential treatment to national laws; planning security means that the glo-balized multinationals can plan their invest-ments for several years in advance without running the risk to be hindered to realize them by appropriate national legislation.

As to the union VPODs suspicion that through the back door also state services

such as education or health might be ne-gotiated; the answer: Well, this idea is based on misconceptions.

Since the SECO cannot or does not want to put its cards on the table, the question which of the above-mentioned ideas are correct or false, remains un-answered.

Neither do the Basel VPOD mem-bers nor do we know what is right or wrong. The citizens have to speak out together with the Green Parlamentary Group in Berne and the Basel, bus and tram chauffeurs and must request a stop of these negotiations which would cer-tainly enable a run of the large global corporations onto the service business in Switzerland and in many other coun-tries, but which would also be much to the detriment of our SMEs, employees, consumers and our high-quality public service.

Motion TiSA. Service public is non-negotiable

With the Motion TiSA. Service pub-lic is non-negotiable (No. 14.3368 of 8 May 2014, which has not yet been negotiated in plenary) the Green Parliamentary Group made submit-ted two very clear requests to the Federal Council a year ago: 1. The Federa l Counc i l must guarantee that no servic-es of the public service will be of-fered in the TISA negotiations. 2. The Federal Council is mandat-ed to disclose the negotiation man-date of SECO concerning TISA at least to the relevant committees [of the National Council and the Council of States, note by Current Concerns].

The response of the Federal Coun-cil gives rise to the highest concern: After repeating the above-men-tioned strategies of obscuring the facts the lapidary sentence follows: The Federal Council requests the re-jection of the motion.

In plain English: First the Federal Council refuses to ensure the protec-tion of the public service against lib-eralization / privatization.

Secondly the Federal Council in-sists on its claim that it had received the mandate for its secret TISA ne-gotiations 12 years ago by the parlia-ment, not for TISA negotiations, but for something similar.

It is now up to the National Coun-cil and the Council of States to put the Federal Council in its place.

TiSA a secretly negotiated continued from page 7

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 9

In May 2009, the Civil War between the Tamil Liberation Army LTTE (Libera-tion Tigers of Tamil Eelam) and the gov-ernment of Sri Lanka ended after bloody and extremely force-ful battle, a devastat-ing civil war which had been the ultimate result of the colonial policy of the British.

Before the colonial period, the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil minority had had their own kingdoms. Afterwards the Brit-ish created a centralized state and handed power over to the Sinhalese, who abused it to dominate the Tamils. After the departure of the British, a painful history began for the Tamil mi-nority that took decades of discrimination with partly violent action on the part of the Sinhalese majority. In several waves of refugees many Tamils came to Switzerland and found refuge against the pogroms, triggered by the Sinhalese. The Tamils' re-sistance intensified after having tried from 1948 to 1976 to improve their situation in a peaceful, non-violent way, however, with-out success. When repression became in-creasingly brutal and violent, the Tamils built up an armed resistance that was very successful initially. After 11 September 2001, the situation of Tamils worsened be-cause their struggle for human rights was labeled terror. All Tamil organizations in 27 countries were declared terrorist organ-isations, consequently they ere prohibited and paralyzed. The government of Mahinda Rajapakse was uncompromising and took ruthless ac-tion against the military arm of the LTTE and ended the fight with a cruel massacre, which has not been shed light on to date. In January of this year, there were elections in Sri Lanka, and a new government came to power. It appears to be more moderate-ly-minded towards the Tamils and is work-ing towards reconciliation between the two peoples. Professor S. J. Emmanuel, Cath-olic priest and the President of the Global Tamil Forum, explains in the following in-terview, what this means for the Tamil peo-ple.

Current Concerns: Almost six years have passed since the official end of the civil war. What happened to the Tamils after the Civil War?Professor Emmanuel: The period after the Civil War was marked by an ultra-genocide. Genocide is defined as the

mass murder of a people. With Ultra-genocide I mean the government's at-tempt to eradicate the existential root of the people and to eliminate their cul-tural and national identity. Immediately after the war, all Tamil war graves were leveled with bulldozers and the govern-ment built military buildings on them. The commemoration of the victims on the Tamil national holiday on 27 Novem-ber was prohibited. It is an attempt by the government to erase the memory of the war and the war victims from the memo-ry of the people!

That certainly severely hurt the people.Yes, they are not allowed to visit the graves of their relatives. Also it is not allowed to name streets after the names of deceased people who were esteemed among the Tamil nation. The plan is to make the peo-ple forget about the LTTE, their memory is to fade away.

What did the government do to attain that goal?There were enforced Singhalese settle-ments in the Tamil areas. I do not mind about Singhalese and Tamils living togeth-er in one area, but if this is a planned pro-cedure and Singhalese are forced to live there, I do reject it.What else has the government of the previ-ous president Rajapakse done?They have disowned Tamils and taken their land. The Tamils were helpless since the government has enforced that with military presence. Tamil villages were re-named Singhalese. Street names were also changed. This demographic change is tan-tamount to genocide.

Did the Singhalese population support these operations?This is something we need to understand. Rajapakse was the one who won the war against the terrorists. For this he was ad-mired like a god by the Singhalese popula-tion. After 60 years he finally succeeded in defeating the LTTE. This is why the people supported everything he did.

Has anything changed for the Tamils after the January elections?Yes, they have given the Tamils a bit of freedom and hope. I had recommended the Tamils to vote in order to obtain some change, a change of regime. A new gov-ernment was urgently needed in the coun-try. The new president has been elected be-cause Tamils and Muslims voted and voted for him; otherwise he would not have suc-ceeded.

Is the new president aware of this?Yes, he said this in public and he trav-elled to Jaffna and Trincomalee to thank the Tamils. This is a different situation than the one with Rajapakse who had been voted for by the majority of the Singhalese. The Tamils had run the risk of electing him without previous concessions.

Why?After the war, the new government had only talked but not acted positively. On the contrary: The Tamils life became even wearier. Also the promised compensation and reconciliation after the civil war was not realized. This is why the Tamils are now impatiently waiting for an improve-ment of the situation.

Is this realistic?Well, lets say there is hope. In the first 100 days the government wanted to im-prove their international relations. Before the war came to an end, the government had received weapons and financial sup-port from 20 western governments. But after the victory in May 2009, they turned away from the US and the West, building up friendship with China, Russia, Paki-stan and Iran. Thus the new government intends to improve its relations with the western world and India. In order to im-prove the relations, the new president has sent his foreign minister to many countries and international organisations. He himself has visited India, England, China and Pa-kistan. Secondly it intended to take some measures against the corruption by the Ra-japakse family and its clans. And thirdly it wanted to change some parts of the con-stitution. For the Tamils this did not have a big effect except the facts that a part of the land was returned and that a civil gov-ernment was installed instead of the mili-tary governor in the north and east of the country, so that the provincial governments could start working again. We Tamils are still awaiting a political solution.

Is there any hope?The new president is not an unknown. He has political experience. Under Rajapakse he was minister of health and during the last days of the Civil War he was even dep-uty president since Rajapakse was staying in Jordan. Thus he was also head of the army, but he had no say there. The power was exclusively in the hands of the military, commanded by the [presidents] brother Gotabhaya Rajapakse.

A hopeful beginning for all TamilsInterview with Professor Dr S. J. Emmanuel, President of the Global Tamil Forum

Prof Dr. S. J. Emmanuel

(picture thk)

continued on page 10

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 10

continued on page 11

Then he has defeated his party colleague in the elections?With a coalition plan, the former president Mrs Chandrika Bandaranaike and the former prime minister Ranil Wickremes-inge stealthily snatched the current presi-dent from his former party and made him the candidate of the opposition party in the presidential elections. He had left Ra-japakses party and joined the opposition. Other ministers also did this. They are now again in government.

Is there only one party governing?No, it is a coalition of several parties, Siri-sena had aimed for. That resulted in a dif-ferent character of the government. That was a wise decision.

Is there already any sign that it is taking effect?The new government has a program that promises to reduce the power of the Pres-ident within the first 100 days. Now, the government tries to change the Constitu-tion. Probably, there will a new election of the Parliament be taking place at the end of June 2015.

Did the President stick to it?The President supported the decision and began to address the problem of corrup-tion. For example Rajapakse has built a huge palace and an airport to prove his power to the Tamils in Jaffna. Sirisena, the new President, has changed it to a hotel and opened it to the general public now.

Where did the huge amount of money come from, with which Rajapakse could fund his projects after the civil war had driven the country almost in ruin?You must see that from the geo-strate-gic viewpoint. China has a great inter-est in good relations with Sri Lanka due to its strategic location. Agreements with Sri Lanka have been concluded, and lots of money and aid came into the country. Thus, China had always some influence in Sri Lanka. One has begun to build a new port city in Colombo with funding from China. The new government has stopped the construction. The people were very unhappy about these projects.Does his policy contribute to the im-provement of the Tamils living condi-tions?President Sirisena is seeking a reconcili-ation. He was in Jaffna and Trincomalee, as mentioned before, and promised an im-provement of their situation to the people, still nothing concrete, but he encouraged the coming together of people.

Do the people of Sri Lanka feel the im-pact?For the people who are affected by the years of civil war, there are still no direct improvements, but the situation has eased somewhat. For instance, the land the mili-tary had taken from them has been partial-ly returned. One has reduced the military government in the province of Jaffna and handed over the operations to the elected provincial government. Thus the civil gov-ernment and the provincial council can re-sume their activities. This is a hopeful start for all Tamils.

Who is that Sirisena?In contrast to Rajapakse, who comes from the upper class and grew up in a political dynasty, Sirisena comes from a modest background. When Pope Francis visited Sri Lanka, he called him a person rooted to his native soil. Sirisena has rural roots, he is a man of the people.

Since the end of the Civil War Sri Lanka has refused to allow an UN Inquiring Commission to visit the country, in order to examine the potential war crimes that have been committed at the end of the Civil War. Is there any chance of change under the new President?One will see. The geo-strategic position of Sri Lanka is of great importance with re-gard to this.

In what way?In the final stage of the war nearly 20 states participated in the fight against the Tamil Tigers, which Bush described as a war against terrorism. After the end of the war these States expected gratitude by the Government, but Rajapakse focused more on China and Russia, which was perceived by the Western states as a great humilia-tion. Even worse he had promised to the West to reconcile with the Tamils and to find a political solution. But immediately after the war, he started genocidal meas-ures against the Tamils.

Who expressed particular dismay?Since the United States with regard to the competition against China would like to control the trade routes of the Chinese, they tried to gain more influence on the situation, and wanted to make use of the UN Human Rights Council to this end.

How that?They wanted to get a resolution passed that would have allowed to investigate into the activities during and after the Civil War. But the resolution was rejected by the ma-jority of the Council with the argument that the United States and the former colonial powers would interfere with the internal af-fairs of Sri Lanka.

Did the United States give up after that?No, they issued another resolution, which also was not agreed upon. One wanted to take Sri Lanka to the International Crimi-nal Court, which was, however, vetoed by China and Pakistan. But then, a third at-tempt was successful. An investigation of crimes against humanity in the last phase of the war of 2009 is now to be executed.

Its an interesting question, why the West took action against the government only after the war. Crimes against the Tamils, and the strong discrimination have existed many years before.Yes, this is indeed interesting. The former High Commissioner for human rights, Lou-ise Arbor, and her successor have travelled to Sri Lanka during the Civil War and after the war and were in contact with Tamil vic-tims of the war at that time. Moreover, they created a report which caused great dis-pleasure at the UN, and they were labeled white Tamil Tigers. The Western States did nothing against the catastrophic situa-tion in Sri Lanka.

How does the new High Commissioner for Peoples rights, Zaid Raad Al Hussein, perceive all this?Zaid is interested in moving on and con-tributing to reconciliation between the peo-ples. He had wanted to come to Sri Lanka during the times of the former govern-ment but his entry was denied. In addition, the former government made a resolution which enacted an evaluation and a human-itarian rescue of the Tamils would be done first before the LTTE. That government did not want to cooperate with the Council of Peoples Rights.

How does the current government behave?It began to renew relationships to the west. The first visit, Sirisena made together with the exterior minister, was made to India. Later the President of India came to Sri Lanka and visited Colombo and Jaffna. The international situation for the govern-ing of Sri Lanka is not bad in general.

How will the Resolution be carried for-ward, which was accepted by the Council?Its implementation was postponed until September. The High Commissioner Zaid Hussein wants to travel to Sri Lanka first and make his personal observations. Ac-cording to this argumentation, one wanted to give the government more time, initial-ly. The new Sri Lankan government want-ed to gain more time in order to make its own evaluation. It accepted, just as the for-mer government did, no international eval-uation. They wanted to have internation-al help for appointing their own evaluation

A hopeful beginning continued from page 9

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 11

commission. The Tamils and the victims of war, because of their painful experience, have no confidence that such an interna-tional commission would be able to judge fairly.

Recently, Didier Burkhalter was in Sri Lanka and met with the new government. How would you judge this visit?I estimate this very positively. Switzerland has helped the Tamils in difficult times. Even today, politics regarding the Tam-ils, is good. In my opinion, it is a sign of hope when Didier Burkhalter travels to Sri Lanka.

Professor Emmanuel, thank you sincerely for this interview.

(Interview: Thomas Kaiser)

A hopeful beginning continued from page 10

Moscow / Vien-na. In a tele-vised speech on 17 April 2015, Professor Hans Kchler, Presi-dent of the In-t e r n a t i o n a l Progress Organ-ization (I.P.O.), told a seminar on the theory of in-ternational con-flicts in Moscow

that Security Council resolution 2216, adopted on 14 April 2015, has further exacerbated the conflict in Yemen. In-stead of imposing an inclusive arms em-bargo on all warring parties, the Coun-cil chose to ban the sale and transfer of arms to only one party to the conflict, namely the Houthi insurgents. As in any situation of domestic strife, such par-tisan support will make peaceful set-tlement between the adversaries much more difficult. Calling upon neighbor-ing states to inspect all cargo to Yemen (operative para. 15 of the resolution1), the Council has, though unintendedly, provided a further excuse to those who are responsible for a de facto humanitar-ian embargo that has caused even more death and suffering among the civilian population.

In his remarks on War and Geopoli-tics in the Arabian Peninsula Professor Kchler further explained that the armed intervention of a Saudi-led coalition of Sunni Arab states could make this domes-tic social conflict a sectarian war along the Sunni-Shia divide with ramifications in the entire Muslim world, including reper-cussions in Saudi Arabia with its sizable Shia population. The unilateral war of the Kingdom and her allies, not authorized under international law, has further con-tributed to the conflict becoming a proxy war between regional powers, making the initially local dispute even more intracta-ble. Logistical and intelligence coopera-tion of the Saudi military with the Unit-ed States in the conduct of aerial attacks in Yemen has given the conflict a geopo-litical dimension along the blueprint for a Greater Middle East drawn up by an earlier U.S. administration. It is regretta-ble that after the infamous Libya resolu-tion 1973(2011) the United Nations Se-curity Council has created the framework for another failed state scenario.

At the wider regional and global level, the question cui bono? (to whose benefit?) cannot be avoided. The old colonial maxim of divide et impera (divide and rule) seems again to be applied in the setting of the 21st centurys interventionist policies.

Responding to a question from the moderator, Professor Kchler said that

the old regional order, established after World War I, is crumbling and the polit-ical disintegration will be reflected in the changing political map of the region. In a post-Sykes-Picot environment, where the status quo is simply untenable, a long pe-riod of instability may be ahead for the en-tire Middle East, with serious implications for the security in neighboring regions, in-cluding in Europe.

Looking at the experience in Afghani-stan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya, among others, the intervening powers from within and outside the Middle East may again come to regret the unintended consequences of their actions.

1 [] 15. [The Security Council] Calls upon

Member States, in particular States neighbour-ing Yemen, to inspect, in accordance with their national authorities and legislation and consist-ent with international law, in particular the law of the sea and relevant international civil avia-tion agreements, all cargo to Yemen, in their territory, including seaports and airports, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe the cargo con-tains items the supply, sale, or transfer of which is prohibited by paragraph 14 of this resolution for the purpose of ensuring strict implemen-tation of those provisions; Source: Security Council Resolution from 14 April 2015 (ex-tract); http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/2216%20(2015)

Source: www.i-p-o.org from 17 April 2015

Security Council Resolution on war in Yemen not conducive to peace

Professor Dr Hans Kchler, President of International Progress Organization, addresses expert meeting at Peoples Friendship University of Russia

Prof Dr Hans Kchler (picture ef)

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 12

In case the new findings laid out in the press with relish, about the sleaze coopera-tion between the German Bun-desnachrichten-dienst BND and the Ameri-can intelligence services on the intense spy-ing upon Ger-man and Euro-pean industry,

are true if only a little Ms Chancel-lor should draw the consequences. Why should the black-red-gold flag still fly over the Federal Chancellery? The poster with the three monkeys hear nothing see nothing say nothing would be much more fitting, instead. However, something was actually said: that was in the summer of 2013, when the NSA wiretapping scan-dal was declared closed and things were sent down the wrong tracks.

But the problem lies deeper. This be-comes evident by many citizens worried questions. They are directed at the issue of German sovereignty and at the ques-tion whether there might be a so-called chancellor dossier. If one investigates, it

seems that statements of this kind go back to a former MAD* chairman. They allege that a candidate for the German chancel-lorship has to confirm by loyalty oath in the oval office of the White House, before he can take office in Germany. Of course, one runs a risk in using a former MAD chairman as a key witness for such bold assertions. Actually, the MAD has never been known for being able to judge things of state political importance. But the uneasiness is there and is being nour-ished by publications by the dozen.

It is not only the knowledge of many cit-izens about the influence of American fi-nanciers on the German press that contrib-utes to this suspicion. Fact is, after all, that in the United States different rules apply for a financial or any other commitment of foreigners in the press sector than those that are applied for American financiers in the German press. There may be historical reasons that the principle of reciprocity is being applied differently on both sides of the Atlantic, although it concerns the treat-ment of the very same issue. Such differ-ences are, however, not appropriate today.

Most people in the country are vehe-mently displeased to notice murderous activities such as drone operations from German bases under US control. This has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with common defense. For the highest consti-

tutional organs, such as President, Pres-ident of the Bundestag, President of the Constitutional Court and the Chancellor, it would be a state-political obligation to stop these criminal activities. Thereby they would serve the world peace. This is explicitly postulated in their own consti-tution, however, nobody cares about that.

Precisely, the things that became known about the interception practices at the ex-pense of ones own German or European industry by ones own intelligence service makes us indeed not only think about a state within the state, but also about the fact that a foreign state has usurped Ger-man state authorities and uses them with or without the knowledge of the Federal Chancellery against the German citizens.

The crux of the matter is probably that via the contracts, as they have been con-cluded on the occasion of the reunifica-tion of Germany by the dozen in order not to jeopardize the intrinsic goal of the reunification from a German perspective occupational law provisions that had nothing to do with the common NATO defense were imposed on reunified Ger-many. Today we see the consequences thereof, as even highest court judgments make clear. Ms Chancellor should seize any opportunity to stop this situation. * MAD (Military Counterintelligence)

Colonial territoryby Willy Wimmer

Willy Wimmer (picture ma)

Current ConcernsThe international journal for independent thought, ethical standards, moral responsibility, and for the promotion

and respect of public international law, human rights and humanitarian law

Subscribe to Current Concerns The journal of an independent cooperativeThe cooperative Zeit-Fragen is a politically and financially independent organisation. All of its mem bers work on a voluntary and honorary basis. The journal does not accept commercial advertisements of any kind and receives no financial support from business organisations. The journal Current Concerns is financed exclusively by its subscribers. We warmly recommend our model of free and independent press coverage to other journals. Annual subscription rate ofCHF 40,-; Euro 30,-; USD 40,-; GBP 25,-for the following countries:Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hongkong, Iceland, Ireland, Is-rael, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Qatar, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Swit-zerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, USAAnnual subscription rate ofCHF 20,-; Euro 15,-; USD 20,-; GBP 12,50for all other countries.Please choose one of the following ways of payment:- send a cheque to Current Concerns, P. O. Box, CH-8044 Zurich, or- send us your credit card details (only Visa), or- pay into one of the following accounts:CH: Postscheck-Konto (CHF): 87-644472-4 IBAN CH91 0900 0000 8764 4472 4 BIC POFICHBEXXXCH: Postscheck-Konto (Euro): 91-738798-6 IBAN CH83 0900 0000 9173 8798 6 BIC POFICHBEXXXD: Volksbank Tbingen, Kto. 67 517 005, BLZ 64190110 IBAN DE12 6419 0110 0067 5170 05 BIC GENODES1TUEA: Raiffeisen Landesbank, Kto. 1-05.713.599, BLZ 37000 IBAN AT55 3700 0001 0571 3599 BIC RVVGAT2B

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 13

In the current debate about Swiss h isto -ry, the role of oral tradition is not appreciat-ed. Should his-torians not deal with this issue?

W i t h o u t commenting on the question of whether Rtli, M o rg a r t e n and other his-torical images are myths or ac-

tual events it is worth remembering that few people were literate in those days. And only a few of those people wrote down the events. And even those rapporteurs of for-mer events were very rarely eye-witnesses of what happened. They relied on oral in-formation which had in some cases been given them long after the event.

This applies to all civilizations. Over thousands of years, people have orally passed on the knowledge of their tribes history, of water sources, hunting grounds, flint sources for their spearheads, etc. This awareness of the importance of remember-ing was, for example, given expression in former times in the East of Africa by call-ing the dead those that still have being as long as they were still alive in the mem-ory of living people.

When Jesus walked the earth, he was not accompanied by any secretary who drew up a report of his teachings, his par-ables and his images. What he said at the Last Supper, was passed on orally and not recorded in writing until hundreds of years later as part of the Bible.

One of the authors acquaintances, being very familiar with New Zealand, pointed out to him that the Maori, who had long ago migrated to those territories from the Pacific, had no written language but passed on their whole history orally from generation to generation. So there are many families who still know today

on which ship their ancestors rowed from Polynesia to New Zealand hundreds of years ago.

Why did Iceland have such a signifi-cant literature? It is located in the sea in the far north and its harsh landscape struc-ture corresponds well to that of Europe millions of years ago. During the long hard winters with their nights lasting up to 24 hours there was almost nothing to do. There were no news and no distrac-tions. The extended families lived under their earth-covered roofs in their far-flung houses which were buried halfway in the ground and told each other the story of their ancestors, and the younger genera-tion later passed them on to their children and then some were written down. In this way literature and history developed.

Here is a typical case of a true oral tra-dition: in 1819, a boy was born in Zurich, whose last name began with an E and who still stands before the main station of Zurich today. The family name of his half-brother, born in 1829, who later became a clergyman, however, began with an F, although both had the same father. Much later, in the mid-20th century, a descendant of the clergyman named F ... was made guild master in Zurich. In the speeches at the Sechseluten it was often point-ed out more or less wittily that the guild master should actually be called E .... But in 1829 and also later it was unthink-able to record in writing anywhere that the clergyman F had a biological fa-ther who was not the one whose name he bore. Even when he died, and the Neue Zrcher Zeitung of 22 November 1911 dedicated more than the whole front page to him, his biological father was not even hinted at. But thanks to oral tradition and despite of all the written documentation to the contrary, the society of Zurich was up to date even 150 years later.

There is another important argument for not underestimating the veracity of oral lore stemming from the distant past. Today we are all distracted from close and careful listening, from thinking for our-selves and from the reliable storage of in-

formation in our minds by the incessant bombardment of mostly utterly unimpor-tant messages. On the other hand, life used to be very boring for the vast majority of people despite their struggle for survival. When 700 years ago, a grandmother told the young people at night, by the light of a little oil lamp, what had happened in for-mer times, they probably remembered the details more easily and more accurately than we would today, when the TV stays turned on during our conversations and we constantly type our mobile phones.

(Translation Current Concerns)

Legend Truth oral traditionby Gotthard Frick, Bottmingen

Gotthard Frick (picture ma)

Current ConcernsThe international journal for independent

thought, ethical standards, moral responsibility, and for the promotion and respect

of public international law, human rights and humanitarian law

Publisher: Zeit-Fragen CooperativeEditor: Erika VgeliAddress: Current Concerns, P.O. Box, CH-8044 ZurichPhone: +41 (0)44 350 65 50Fax: +41 (0)44 350 65 51E-Mail: CurrentConcerns@zeit-fragen.ch

Subscription details: published regularly electronically as PDF file

Annual subscription rate ofSFr. 40,-, 30,-, 25,-, $ 40,-for the following countries:Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Canada, Cyprus, , Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hongkong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Nether-lands, New Zealand, Norway, Qatar, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, USA

Annual subscription rate ofSFr. 20,-, 15,-, 12,50, $ 20,-for all other countries.

Account: Postscheck-Konto: PC 87-644472-4

The editors reserve the right to shorten letters to the editor. Letters to the editor do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Current Concerns.

2015. All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission.

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 14

In January 2015 (No 2 of 27 January 2015), Current Concerns reported a rul-ing of the German Federal Constitution-al Court in which the communes were granted the right to decide for themselves whether a school was to be closed or not. The ruling came on the basis of a suit filed by the town of Seifhennersdorf. The district, which includes the town Seif-hennersdorf had decided to close down the local secondary school in 2010. The towns opposition, however, remained un-heard. Therefore, the town filed a lawsuit at the competent administrative court in Dresden against the ruling of the district administration aimed at closing down the school. And this court decided to check the school closure and the underlying Ed-ucation Act with respect to constitutional law before it formed a judgment. The court stated inter alia: The ad-ministration of primary and second-ary schools, which have been regularly organized as independent Elementa-ry Schools (ages 614) in the past, is a communal task that has historically de-veloped and thus a matter in the author-ity of the local commune. The tasks as-sociated with the school administration particularly include the decision usu-ally to be taken by the states participa-tion whether a school is to be built or closed down.

This judgment has been largely hushed up so far. Nevertheless, the following ap-plies: Following this ruling, all other fed-eral states have to revise their existing legislative and political practice. More than that: There is every reason to think about the necessary consequences result-ing from the Constitutional Courts ruling and about a political culture in Germany, that focuses on the citizens, their will and their living environment. In our interview, the mayor of the town Seifhennersdorf, Karin Berndt, reports

about her expe-riences in deal-ing with the au-thorities of the Free State of Saxony and the background to the dispute over the rights of the communes de-cision when it comes to closing down schools.

Current Concerns: Mrs Berndt, how did it happen that you decided to take legal action?Karin Berndt: In 2008, our participation in the decision threatened to be withdrawn for the first time.

What does that mean?The Free State of Saxony cannot sim-ply close down schools, but it may with-draw the participation in maintenance when school authorities refuse to give up their school voluntarily. This means that the school will no longer be allocated any teachers, and thus no teaching is possible. The classes or grades may not be formed, and thus the number of pupils enrolling at the school quickly shrinks. Once a school site will be classified as insecure of con-tinuation, all promotional aids, such as the money for school refurbishment, will be cancelled. This usually happens when no 40 new pupils enroll! In that case you are in trouble.

An Eastern German commune and its citizens fight for their rights

Seifhennersdorf teaches a lesson in German democracyInterview with Karin Berndt, Mayor of the town Seifhennersdorf/Saxony

Mayor Karin Berndt (picture tsr)

Seifhennersdorf Secondary School. The Free State Saxony has got two kinds of sec-ondary schools following primary school: the middle school and the gymnasium. The parents of the village put up posters in front of the school, on which they protested against the plans of the Saxonian government to close this school down. (picture dpa)

continued on page 15

Democracy is work, quite hard work from the bottom, and no one should say I will leave that to others to take care of. Our people in Eastern Germany have longed for and fought for freedom. Now they have to learn to deal with it and not see it as a one-way street with self-run-ning character. Sometimes you get the impression that what constitutes freedom is hidden. That freedom is not only fun, but means enormous responsibility and hard work. I want to be able to experience and live democra-cy every day

No 12 11 May 2015 Current Concerns Page 15

An Eastern German commune continued from page 14

How was this number 40 fixed?It is the legally required number, at pre-sent. The Saxon school law requires at least 40 applications for new fifth grad-ers in secondary schools. Especially many rural schools did not reach the necessary quantity and were thus made closure can-didates resulting in their trying to poach pupils from each other. The word school cannibalism was en vogue, and only a few schools could work peacefully as so-called safe school sites. Many schools were given the status under observation and constantly had to fear for their exist-ence. Who wants to lose the school site? Everyone can imagine the adverse effects that all this uncertainty and unrest had on education, on the school climate, on teachers and students, and we can report some wretched experience. The second-ary school in Seifhennersdorf has been under observation due to insecure con-tinuation since 1994.

Through all these years authorities and politicians had known that you can-not decide on school closures from top down, since this is basically only possible by the municipal councils or town coun-cils decision. Therefore, the Education Act was amended in 2001. The legislature then shifted the power of decision to close schools onto the district level. Since then, a school network has been established at the district level, and there you find the sites earmarked for closure. The district council decides and the Ministry of Ed-ucation then approves of the school net-work (if it meets the requirements). Thus they virtually disenfranchised the com-munes, undermined their say, and this is why the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe has to decide now.

This means that since 2001 schools have been closed in Saxony on the basis of an unconstitutional law?Yes, unfortunately! Of the approximate-ly 1,000 closed schools in Saxony, all pri-mary and secondary schools, the biggest part, was affected. However, since 2002 the Landtag has had a legal opinion on its desk expressing doubts about the le-gality of the amendment of the Education Act. Even then, there was evidence that parts of the Education Act might be in-consistent with the Grundgesetz un-fortunately the legal opinion was put into cold storage. Obviously, no one wanted to know about that. During our 2011 lawsuit that we filed against the adverse school network, I learned about this paper. I re-member talking to our lawyer, who said, This has already been said in the Land-tags legal opinion at the ti